BrahimHemdani

I'll try to answer all your points together if I may Super-Ally. Firstly I was coming at this from my perspective as an ex-referee, which is what I thought was being asked of me; I just said at #90 that I understand that Pete (and others including your good self) are looking at it from a different perspective. I respect that point of view 100%. The views that I express on here are my own and not those of SD unless I specifically state otherwise. I do not "represent" Scottish fans. I am the Chair of the Scottish Council of SD, which has approx 15,000 members. We are, however, currently trying to become more representative of Scottish fans through the Scottish Football Supporters Network (SFSN). Directly or indirectly the total membership of SD/SFSN is now in excess of 63,000 and rising rapidly. More than 1,100 individuals alone have signed up through the current survey. One thing that we are trying very hard to achieve at the moment is that the proposed new Code of Conduct or Fan's Charter that will be brought in from next season, gets the widest possible input and consultation with fans and that will start to happen in the new year. You are correct that I am not a fighter and you are also correct of course that the question of "excessive force" on or off a football pitch is a matter of opinion for the football authorities or the courts. I hope that clarifies my position and that of SD.

You may well be right (the Laws are reviewed annually in any event) but what might be clarified is the phrase "excessive force". I cannot see a different view of violent conduct applying to spectators, officials or other persons than players.

I feel you contradict yourself a little by saying the threatening position of the keeper never gave him a chance to stand up and at the same time if the keeper put his body in range of the attacker then he would be putting himself in far more danger than keeping him on the ground with the threat of a kick. If the goalkeeper's threatening position was enough to prevent the spectator standing up, and in my opinion he realised right away that he had bitten off more than he could chew, then why did the keeper need to kick him twice or even once for that matter? I also don't think you answered my earlier question about how many kicks would you deem, not excessive? The Laws of the Game state, inter alia: A player is also guilty of violent conduct if he uses excessive force or brutality against a team-mate, spectator, match official or any other person. As they stand at present the laws don't further distinguish between a spectator in a passive role and one who has entered the field of play or attacks a player. What a about a spectator who attacks a match official or "other person"? So I agree that it IS a matter of interpretation, of the phrase excessive force. I think you would agree that one punch, sometimes little more than a slap is regarded as excessive force, so what about two kicks when a man is lying on the ground, whether that is to keep him down when you appear to say that even the threat of that was enough to do that, or just because the keeper has lost the plot, which is my view. You are right to point out that the Laws may well be changed in future (perhaps to define "excessive force") but I don't think they could distinguish between excessive force used against a player and excessive force used against any other person. However, as they stand right now, I still believe that the referee made the correct decision. If he had not sent the goalkeeper off, thus condoning the two kicks after the first kick/trip that brought the spectator down (which I agree was not excessive force) what kind of signal would that have sent to the goalkeeper or the rest of the players. Put in a nutshell, my opinion is that the two kicks whilst the spectator was on the ground, constitute excessive force within the meaning of the Laws, therefore the keeper was guilty of violent conduct and was rightly sent off. Lastly the Laws also remind referees that "violent conduct often leads to mass confrontation, therefore they must try to avert this with active intevention." I think that's exactly what the referee did. I think it is inconceivable that the referee could have allowed the goalkeeper's actions and not taken action against him. However, I also accept that that is my view as a former refreee and you are coming at it from a different angle.

There might be an argument for it in certain games; if so my three would be: :dg::sp: Bocanegra could play there for years.

A trifle harsh perhaps?

Doesn't have to be restricted to one area, Zappa, least I wouldn't think so.

Australia have been ranked above us in the FIFA rankings for the past 2.5 years and above the USA since April. Try this it's good fun http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtools/index.html

He could have held him down without kicking him twice, he was about twice the size of the fan; and the stewards/police would have done the rest.

YES CORRECT CORRECT AGAIN. The player is bound by the Laws of the Game, the fan is bound by the law of the land. Sorry, don't agree (see juffery's #77). Can I just clarify one point I made last night. I think that the Dutch FA are wrong to rescind the red card but the punishment for the offence is another matter. Had they upheld the red card, they may well have taken account of the extenuating circumstances in deciding the punishment. If I can put your point the other way around. How many times would the goalie have to kick the man lying on the ground before it would become violent conduct in your view?

He's in with Jardine and he's definitely in the know.

For the same reasons that it wasn't safe before. I well remember as a teenager in the 60's going to games and the dilemma was whether to stand with a barrier in front or behind you. In front was the obvious choice for comfort but the barrier behind you was more protective. Also you had to be early to get a barrier at all. This system overcomes all those problems; but so far as I know it is not the only one that is allowed in the pilot schemes. It will be up to the Clubs to demonstrate to the Police and local authorities that anything they want to instal is "safe". I don't see any reason why Rangers couldn't do what you suggest provided they installed appropriate safety systems. Post Hillsborough we are living in a different world.

At this rate, I'll soon be in the first team

Lively debate, shows how perfectly reasonable people can take opposite views and still retain control

Sorry don't agree with that either. A player who enters the field of play is bound by the Laws of the Game, one of which is against Violent Conduct. It is up to the Police and stewards to deal with the attacker.

In my extremely humble opinion they are wrong but it does demonstrate that they are even quicker than the new SFA system :grin:

This clearly shows the steward well on the way there before the goalie kicks the fan on the ground and he is right there when the second kick goes in.

That's irrelevant to the conduct of the goalkeeper but adds to Ajax problems.

He kicked out and downed the guy in the first instance; I would say that that is defending yourself; but once the man is down (and the steward is almost there) IMHO kicking theman who is down is not self defence.

You can't take the law into your own hands, as the "big man" on the train incident clearly demonstrates.

I am not a polis Dutch or Scottish but I'd be astonished if he isn't arrested and of course the spectator.

The game will or certainly should be awarded to Ajax and AZ and their coach heavily punished for walking off. I have never heard of a game being replayed with a team starting with 10 men far less for the remaining time. Either it is replayed from the KO or not all, in my opinion it will be not at all. Ajax will or should be fined because of the fan on the pitch (although not if it was in the SPL!) but othwerwise they didn't cause the match to be abandoned that was AZ.

I can't believe you are being serious here. How can it be self defence to kick a guy not once but twice when he's lying on the ground?

The referee was 100% correct to send the goalkeeper off for violent conduct. VC can be against a player in your own team (once happened to me in my amateur career) or a spectator e.g. Cantona & El haj Diouf or an official. I am incredulous that the Dutch FA reportedly have reversed the red card. I wouldn't be surprised if UEFA step in to set them right.

Disagree, the goalie and the manager are both out of order.

You forgot Davy Wilson!